Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Fule's
SUPREME COURT luggage was missing. She went to Sabena
Manila office but found it closed. After 40
minutes of waiting a Sabena personnel
THIRD DIVISION arrived and advised her to wait for the
next flight from Brussels because her
luggage might be in it. But when the flight
G.R. No. 82068 March 31, 1989
arrived it was not among those which
were carried. (TSN, pp. 19-22, Jan. 16,
SABENA BELGIAN WORLD AIRLINES, petitioner, 1980) So, she returned to Sabena office
vs. but it was already closed. She then went to
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS (SEVENTH Iberia Airlines Office where she was
DIVISION) CONCEPCION, OCTAVIO, ESTRELLA asked to prepare a reclaimation letter and
and GEMMA, all surnamed FULE, respondents. advised to go to her hotel and wait for a
call. (Id., pp. 22-24, 30)
GUTIERREZ, JR., J.:
Plaintiff-appellees checked in at Hotel
The only issue in this case is whether or not the petitioner, Dante, (Id., p. 31) As Mrs. Fule wanted to
Sabena Belgian World Airlines, is liable to the respondents change her clothes, she bought a dress and
for damages arising from breach of contract of carriage. a nightgown at a department store, El
Cortes Ingles, for which she paid 5,000
The antecendent facts were summarized by the respondent pesetas (Exhs. D to D-2; TSN, pp. 32-33,
Court of Appeals as follows: Jan. 16, 1980). Afterwards, she made an
overseas call to her daughter in Manila,
On March 27, 1979, the plaintiff-appellee who was working at Air France, to find
Concepcion F. Fule purchased three round out whether her luggage had not been left
trip tickets for herself and two children, in Manila. For the Telephone call she paid
Estrella and Gemma, from the defendant- 2,775 pesetas. (Exh. E)
appellant Sabena World Airlines for the
routes covering Manila-Brussels- Then at 10:30 in the evening, Iberia
Barcelona-Madrid. (Exhs. A, B and C) On Airlines called and informed her that her
March 29, 1979, she and her children took luggage had arrived. (TSN, p. 5, March 5,
the Sabena flight No. 274, arriving in 1980) She, therefore, took a cab to the
Brussels, Belgium at 6:00 o'clock in the airport and the round trip taxi fare
morning of March 30, 1979. Just before amounted to 920 pesetas. (Id., p. 9; Exh.
the flight arrived in Brussels, it was F)
announced that the city would be cloudy
and rainy and in fact when the plane At the hotel, Mrs. Fule asked for a doctor
arrived there was a slight drizzle. (TSN, because she felt sick, lost her voice and
pp. 5-6, April 17, 1980) Before had an attack of asthma. Her children
disembarking, the plaintiff- appellees put developed fever due to colds, attributed to
on their sweaters and winter coats but did the rainy weather condition upon their
not cover their heads. Mrs. Fule thought arrived and departure from Brussels. The
there would be a shuttle bus or a ground doctor gave them injections and
steward with umbrella to bring them to the prescribed medicines for them. (Id., pp.
terminal building. However, there was 12-14) Plaintiff-appellees incurred
none and the plaintiff-appellees had to medical expenses amounting to 3,000
walk towards the terminal building which pesetas (Exhs. G, H and I). Plaintiff-
was about 20 to 30 meters from the plane. appellees also incurred hotel expenses
As a result, their winter coats got wet, as amounting to 14,320 pesetas. (Exh. J)
did the front portion of Mrs. Fule's dress
as she could not hold her coat to keep it After reaching Madrid, Mrs. Fule made a
from opening. (Id., pp. 7-8; 10-12) letter-complaint to the Sabena office
which she gave to Angel Yancha who told
The plaintiff-appellees waited for about 5 her that the letter would be forwarded to
hours in the transit area of the airport Brussels, as the Madrid office could not
terminal for their connecting flight to do anything about it. (Exh. K) The total
Barcelona, Spain. When their flight was claim for actual damages was 26,015
announced, they had to walk again in the pesetas.
rain without head covers. (Id., pp. 17-18)
In Barcelona, while the luggages of her
A few weeks later, Yancha informed her was not settled in
that the Madrid office would pay about Madrid.
half of what she was asking, and the
balance would be paid in Manila. She b. P 50,000.00-as moral
received a check amounting to 8,620 damages for the serious
pesetas and signed a document (Exh- L) anxiety and fright
written in French, a language she did not caused plaintiffs'
understand. (Id., pp. 21-26) Yancha did incident in Mrs. Fule's
not explain the contents of the document missing maleta and the
to her and it was only upon her return to trouble she was placed
Manila that she learned that the document in retrieving the same
was a quitclaim. Her daughter, who spoke late at night in
French, explained its content to her. The Barcelona. .
plaintiff-appellee made a demand on the
Manila office of Sabena for the balance of c. P 50,000.00-as
their claim for 26,015 pesetas and P
exemplary damages for
200,000.00 as moral damages. (Exh. M)
defendant's callous
indifference in
During the trial, the defendant-appellant protecting plaintiffs
airline company presented Angel Yancha from the inclement
as its witness. Yancha confirmed that Mrs. weather when
Fule had talked to him about the problem disembarking from and
she and her children had encountered in embarking on its
Brussels and Barcelona and that she airplane in Brussels
wanted to make a claim against Sabena when the nose-loader
for the expenses she had incurred. Upon could not be used and
Yancha's advice, Fule wrote a demand for its bad faith in
letter to the airline. This letter was given deceiving Mrs. Fule
to Alejandro Abeledo, the Madrid office signing a document in
sales manager, who sent it to the airline's French that purportedly
general manager. Sabena's Madrid office was merely a receipt
got a reply from Brussels, directing it to that was in reality a
pay Mrs. Fule about 8,000 pesetas. quitclaim.
Yancha gave the check and a letter to Mrs.
Fule, telling her that she was being paid
d. P 10,000.00-by way
only such amount and not the total amount of attorney's fees under
of her claim. He asked Mrs. Fule to sign the provisions of sub-
the letter, written in French (which turned
paragraphs (1), (2), and
out to be a quitclaim), to serve as a receipt
(11), Art. 2208 of the
for the amount paid to her. (TSN, pp. 3-
Civil Code.
10, Nov. 27, 1980) Yancha said he did not
ask Mrs. Fule whether she understood
French. The letter was not translated to e. Pay the costs of suit.
her. He also told Mrs. Fule to contact the (pp. 31-34, Rollo)
Manila Office for information about the
difference in her claim. (Id., pp. 21 and On appeal to the respondent Court of Appeals, the decision
23) was modified. The appellate court reduced the amount of
moral and exemplary damages from P 50,000.00 to P
On the basis of these facts, the lower court 25,000.00 each. In all other respects, the appealed decision
found the defendant-appellant liable. The was affirmed.
dispositive portion of its decision states:
On March 30, 1988, the petitioner went to this Court on
WHEREFORE, all the foregoing petition for review on certiorari presenting its alleged
considered, this Court sentences defendant pivotal issues, namely:
Sabena World Airlines to pay plaintiffs
the following amounts: 1. WHETHER THE DOCUMENT
(EXHIBIT "L" AND EXHIBIT "1")
a. P l,981.21-as actual ACCOMPANYING THE CHECK IS
damage representing the JUST A RECEIPT, OR A VALID
l7,395 pesetas balance QUITCLAIM WHICH FORECLOSES
of plaintiffs claim that PRIVATE RESPONDENTS' CAUSES
OF ACTION AGAINST THE quitclaim, Mrs. Fule did not know that she was made to sign
PETITIONER. a quitclaim. The document, in its English translation which
the petitioner insists is the binding translation for lack of
2. WHETHER THE PETITIONER opposition from the respondents, states the following:
COMMITTED AN ACT OF DUPLICITY
AND BAD FAITH IN LETTING I, the undersigned, Mrs. Concepcion
PRIVATE RESPONDENT Foronda de Fule, (address) declare to have
CONCEPCION FULE SIGN THE received from Sabena (Societe Anonymo
DOCUMENT (EXHIBIT "L" AND Belgo d'Exploitation de la Navigation
EXHIBIT "1") WHEN SHE RECEIVED Adrienne) the sum of Pesetas 8,620.00
THE CHECK. (Eight thousand six hundred twenty)
We also note that in its appeal to the Court of Appeals, the Indeed, the flaw in the trial court's
petitioner alleged in its brief the following assignment of decision is its assumption that every case
error: "The trial court erred in not holding that by the of mental anguish or fright or serious
quitclaim (Exh. L; Exhs. 1 and 1-a) the plaintiff- appellees anxiety calls for the award of moral
have no cause of action against the defendant-appellant for damages. While the enumeration of cases
moral and exemplary damages and in not sustaining the in Art. 2219 is not exclusive, the
validity of the said quitclaim." (p. 52, Rollo) In its defendant's act must be wrongful or
discussion, the petitioner insisted that the trial court erred in wanton or done in bad faith to justify the
concluding that Exhibit L is only a receipt and that the imposition of moral damages. Here, there
respondent understood it as such. It argued that the rest of is no finding that the carrier's delay in
the document recites a quitclaim and the respondent delivering Mrs. Fule's luggage was
understood French because she received her schooling in wrongful or due to bad faith.
Spain where French is taught. In the present petition,
however, the petitioner alleges that it is both a receipt and a
Nonetheless, an award of P 25,000.00 for
quitclaim but it does not foreclose the respondent's right to
the airline's bad faith in making Mrs. Fule
collect the balance of her claim. It is obvious that the
petitioner is taking inconsistent positions which this Court sign a quitclaim without informing her of
may not allow. its contents, which were written in French,
is in our opinion justified.
In the last two issues, the petitioner argues
With respect to the award for exemplary
that the appellate court erred in still
awarding moral and exemplary damages damages, the amount of P 50,000.00 must
inspire of its express declaration that the be reduced by half. The trial court gave
this award for (1) the defendant-
petitioner did not act in bad faith. This
appellant's 'callous indifference in
allegation is misleading because the Court
protecting plaintiffs from the inclement
of Appeals did not declare the petitioner
weather when disembarking from and
entirely faultless. The appellate court held:
embarking on its plane in Brussels' and (2)
for deceiving Mrs. Fule into signing a
But we do not think the award of moral quitclaim by representing it to be merely a
damages for the trouble which Mrs. Fule receipt for partial payment of her claims.
had gone through as a result of the delay
in the delivery of her luggage in
While we hold that the failure of the WHEREFORE, IN VIEW OF ALL FOREGOING, the
defendant-appellant to protect the petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit. The
plaintiff-appellees from the rain in appealed decision is AFFIRMED,
disembarking from the plane for the
stopover in Brussels and again in SO ORDERED.
reboarding it for the onward flight to
Barcelona constitutes a neglect of its duty
Fernan, C.J.,(Chairman), Feliciano, Bidin and Cortes, JJ.,
to its passengers, we do not think that its concur,
neglect was so gross as to amount to bad
faith or wantonness. (Civil Code, Art.
2232) The award of exemplary damages
cannot be justified. In the Airlines Cases
in which the Supreme Court awarded
moral and exemplary damages, the
airlines concerned were found guilty of
either gross neglect or malfeasance or
even malice. In contrast, what is involved
in this case was simple negligence,
considering that the rain through which
the plaintiff-appellees had to walk was a
'slight drizzle.' If it was driving rain or
heavy snow, perhaps there would be basis
for finding the defendant- appellant guilty
of gross negligence, in light of the duty of
air carriers to observe 'utmost or
extraordinary diligence,' (Zulueta v. Pan
American World Airway, Inc., 49 SCRA
1, 14, [1973]).